https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108537 The court allowed the plaintiff's application for amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to include defendant No. 3 in the suit filed under Order XXXVII CPC. Despite objections from the defendants regarding delay and failure to seek permission under section 22 of SICA, the court considered the lifting of the legal bar and the plaintiff's subsequent application for amendment as valid. Emphasizing the necessity of defendant No. 3 for final adjudication, the court rejected the defendants' objections, permitted the amendment, and directed the amended plaint to be recorded, with costs imposed. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:51:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108537 The court allowed the plaintiff's application for amendment under Order VI Rule 17 CPC to include defendant No. 3 in the suit filed under Order XXXVII CPC. Despite objections from the defendants regarding delay and failure to seek permission under section 22 of SICA, the court considered the lifting of the legal bar and the plaintiff's subsequent application for amendment as valid. Emphasizing the necessity of defendant No. 3 for final adjudication, the court rejected the defendants' objections, permitted the amendment, and directed the amended plaint to be recorded, with costs imposed. Case-Laws Companies Law Wed, 02 Apr 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108537